Parliament is to be given a take-it-or leave-it plebiscite on the final Brexit deal before the UK leaves the EU.
Brexit Secretary David Davis state the terms of the UK’s exit, such as money, citizen rights and any transition requirement become law via a new Act of Parliament.
While any deal would «only hold» if MPs approved it, he said it transfer not alter the fact the UK was leaving the EU.
Labour welcomed a «climbdown» but some MPs premonished of a «sham» if ministers could not be asked to renegotiate.
The BBC’s political editor Laura Kuenssberg remarked the announcement was significant because it represented a big concession to potential Tory dares and Labour MPs at a highly important moment in the Brexit process.
It comes as MPs ready to debate key Brexit legislation later this week with the authority facing possible defeat on aspects of the EU Withdrawal Bill, which wish convert EU law into UK law.
The UK is due to leave the EU in March 2019, irrespective of whether MPs disavow or reject the terms of the deal negotiated by Theresa May’s government.
But updating MPs on the sixth frank of talks which concluded on Friday, Mr Davis told MPs they purpose still play a major role and «there cannot be any doubt that Parliament make be intimately involved at every stage».
The government had previously agreed to mete MPs a vote on a Commons motion relating to the final Brexit deal — to come it has been voted upon by the European Parliament.
By BBC’s political editor Laura Kuenssberg
A self-assured government wouldn’t have conceded like this the day before the Brexit careful thought was due to come back to the Commons in earnest.
This climbdown does not remotely tight-fisted that other grievances over the existing Brexit legislation bequeath disappear.
It doesn’t mean that the next few weeks will hurriedly become plain sailing. And if there isn’t a withdrawal deal with the lie down of the EU, well, then there can’t be a bill that covers the withdrawal beak.
It’s only in the coming days that the government will know if they be subjected to done enough to get the existing plans through.
And the move also of speed adds to a massive load of complicated Parliamentary business that has to be cleared to come we actually leave.
- LWhy Brexit vote announcement matters
Mr Davis asserted he still «intended and expected» this to happen but went further — concurring to Labour and Tory MPs’ demands for any vote to take place on substantive admirable legislation.
The bill, he told MPs, would contain the contents of the withdrawal accord that the UK hopes to seal in time ahead of its scheduled departure and all key prospects of it — such as the financial settlement between the two sides, the future status of UK and EU city-dwellers and the terms of any implementation period.
- May warns rebels as Brexit timing set out
- EU company groups call for Brexit deal
«This means that Parliament determination be given time to scrutinise, debate and vote on the final deal we slap with the EU,» he said, adding that it was not clear when such a note would be published.
Labour’s Keir Starmer said it was a «significant climbdown from a worn out government on the verge of defeat».
«With less than 24 hours before they had to keep safe their flawed Bill to Parliament, they have finally backed down,» the gloom Brexit secretary said.
«However, like everything with this authority, the devil will be in the detail.»
Labour’s Chris Leslie said what «could be subjected to been a very welcome concession instead looks like a made-up that pretends to respect the sovereignty of Parliament but falls well shy of of what is required».
The Lib Dems reiterated their call for the final dispense to be put to a referendum while several Tory MPs questioned what would materialize if a deal was only agreed at the last minute before the 29 Trek deadline — a scenario Mr Davis has suggested was conceivable — and MPs could only show of hands after exit.
Dominic Grieve said this would not be pleasing and if time ran out then negotiations with the EU should be extended «so all parties are qualified to deal with it».
Antoinette Sandbach pressed Mr Davis to reassure MPs how «if the invoice intended to ensure a meaningful vote only comes forward after that antiquated, the vote is in any sense meaningful».
Mr Davis responded by saying MPs would have in the offing the opportunity to say «either you want the deal or you don’t want it» and if the UK and EU could not agree a administer, there would be no legislation.